Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

And that difference is what makes it not stealing. Copyright infringement =/= stealing.

Furthermore, on the subject of whether it is "wrong" or not, I'd submit that any law that serves only to perpetuate wealth (as is the case for copyright laws) is wrong.

Therefore the law is illegitimate, and disobeying illegitimate laws is not only not wrong, but the right thing to do.

If the pirating a codex gets people into the game and builds enthusiasm, I'm sure GW is fine with that tradeoff. The books are not where GW makes their money, its the models. The books are there to move the models. I'll be honest, I got into this game after downloading a ****ton of codex's online years ago, and after reading through all the stories, fluff and rules, and now I own 2 IG armies, a Sisters of Battle army, a Tyranid army, enough stuff for two CSM armies, an Eldar army and a Tau army, a Warriors of Chaos Fantasy army (enough stuff for 9 armies in total!). Several thousand dollars worth of Warhammer and Warhammer 40,000 products.

I'm pretty sure the GW bookkeepers are happy with that trade-off.




Additionally, yes Piracy != Theft. Theft implies the owner no longer has use of the item. Me going into my neighbors yard and stealing his shovel is theft. Me going into his yard and making a copy of his shovel design for my own personal use is piracy. It's copyright infirngement, not theft. The difference is that in the case of piracy, the owner is not out something they would have necessarily otherwise had. Most pirated books, movies, games, etc would not have ever been purchased anyway. What it is is a violation of use rights, but Theft, wereby the offended party is out the use or benefit of something, it is not. Not saying that its totally fine mind you, but in the case of pirated 40k books I think if it gets people into buying the models and other products it's probably not a bad thing for GW on the whole of it.

Dracos wrote:I buy an apple from you. Inside that apple is a seed. I plant that seed and make copies of apples. Then I give copied apples away.

Actually, if it's a apple grown from Monsanto seeds, this could well be illegal. Okay, so that's technically "patent infringement," not copyright. Excellent analogy otherwise, and I feel that even with my caveat, it does well to point out how insane the laws are.

Excellent. So it seems to be the case that the rest of thread has groped its way to the point I made four pages back, that piracy and theft are separate and distinct crimes.

Now here's the real question. Once you separate downloading a codex from simple theft, and it becomes a new crime, you've separated it from all that terrible emotional and cultural baggage associated with theft. However, that doesn't necessarily make it right or wrong. So how do you judge whether downloading your codex is morally acceptable?

People who say morals vary from culture to culture are silly, because whilst morals are ultimately subjective, the simple fact is that morals are subjective to societies as a whole, not individuals. You may believe differently, and that gang rape, regardless of what society says, is an acceptable thing, but whilst you remain in the minority, you are going against what is morally right for the society, and will be judged as such.

However, people say its bad because its illegal are also silly, simply because legality is not necessarily indicative of morality.

As morality is defined by the masses, the simple fact that we are having this debate shows that it isn't cut and dry. There are wildly varying opinions. The sheer number of people who do breach intellectual property laws means it is genuinely seen as morally acceptable by a significant chunk of society, if not the absolute majority. It no more makes one a bad person then going 5 miles over the speed limit on a empty road. It has become culturally acceptable. And when something becomes culturally acceptable, that generally means it is morally acceptable as well.

I see it as a result of societal shifts with regards to globalisation. As the internet and communications equipment grow better and better, information of all types flows freer, not just the types the government would prefer you to have. What does this mean for society? Who knows. But I predict that the trend of illegally acquiring intellectual property will continue to grow with globalisation, until it is seen as the norm by society. And when that happens (I reckon thirty or forty years), the intellectual property laws will no doubt have to be modified as a result.

Macok wrote:

The Dreadnote wrote:Jesus Christ. I had hoped that this thread would disappear on it's own last night. It's not even fun to read any more.

And yet after this post you still write in it, in a way which definitely isn't going to help stop "the flaming". Keep it up!

I decided that whilst it's still here and going in circles I might as well have a bit of fun with it.

Dracos wrote:The best part of all this is how people are avoiding the most important part of this "piracy = theft" concept.

[...]

You can't possibly claim that copying a purchased book and giving the copies away is stealing, because you are copying your own property. The physical book you bought is yours. It's only the ideas contained within that copyright addresses.

And like was pointed out - it isn't theft. So what? It's THE LEAST important concept here.
That's what makes people ignore the wrong side of the piracy. Because "it's not theft". I ask you again.. So what?


I'm still waiting for any smart contradiction to last part of my post....
(http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/360/332928.page#2231795)
What excuse why piracy is better than stealing, just because because it is not "theft".

With piracy quite often there is no harm inflicted. If I pirated a TV show that I never would have bought, or it gets me to buy their product at a later date, then the rights holders aren't out anything. They aren't hurt as they were never going to benefit from a potential sale or the pirated product may serve to bring them into a product line and begin purchasing. Their property rights have been violated yes, but no actual harm has been done to them, they aren't out anything that would have happened otherwise. If I *steal* the DVD's, then they have been actually damaged. That's the difference.

The only time piracy can be harmful is when it takes the place of theft, meaning you had the will, means and intent to purchase something but did not and it did not serve functionally as a loss leader to get you to purchase additional product. Then there is a real issue.

I think we've seen enough of this for this week.